Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
~George Washington

Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals.
~George Washington

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
~P.J. O’Rourke
“I have the consolation of having added nothing to my private fortune during my public service, and of retiring with hands clean as they are empty.”
~ Thomas Jefferson

Our government… teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
~Louis D. Brandeis

The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return.
~Gore Vidal

This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.
~Will Rogers

Charles Bernard “Charlie” Rangel (born June 11, 1930) has been a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives since 1971, representing the Fifteenth Congressional District of New York, and is the most senior member of that state’s congressional delegation. He is a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus. In January 2007, Rangel became chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.

Rangel graduated from New York University in 1957 and St. John’s University School of Law in 1960, then worked as a private lawyer, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and legal counsel during the early-mid 1960s. He served two terms in the New York State Assembly from 1967 to 1970, then defeated longtime incumbent Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. in a primary challenge on his way to being elected to the House of Representatives.

The New York congressman under investigation for tax evasion, using his office to raise money from corporations with business before him and illegally accepting multiple rent control apartments has for years concealed his true wealth.

It simply marks the latest of numerous corruption scandals in the lengthy political career of Democrat Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. It turns out that the veteran lawmaker, who has represented Harlem in the U.S. House for three decades, is at least twice as wealthy as he originally reported on congressional disclosure forms.

Since the House Ethics Committee finally decided to investigate Rangel’s many violations last fall, the congressman corrected the huge asset omission fearing it would be discovered in the course of the probe. Now his amended disclosure statement for 2007 reports new assets worth between $647,000 and $1.38 million, substantially raising the value of his holdings.

Lying is par for the course for Rangel, who has committed a series of legal and ethical lapses in his storied career. Among them are violating New York state and city regulations by accepting several rent stabilized apartments from a Manhattan developer, using congressional stationery to solicit money for a center named after him and failing to pay taxes for two decades on rental income from a Caribbean villa. Ironically, the House committee he chairs writes the federal tax code.

A few years ago Rangel got in trouble for proposing tax legislation that would greatly benefit his campaign contributors and for lying about secretly accepting an all-expense paid family trip from a terrorist government. He slipped the tax provision into a broad tax relief bill in order to halt current audits of Americans who get breaks for operating businesses in the Virgin Islands.

In 2006 he was caught lying about a 2002 family trip financed by a government that for years has appeared on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist-sponsoring nations, a violation of House ethics rules. Rangel actually lied on his congressional travel disclosure forms to conceal that the Cuban government had paid for him and his family to visit the island to meet with Dictator Fidel Castro to discuss lifting U.S. trade restrictions on Havana.

A day after confidently assuring (“You bet your sweet life!”) that he still chairs the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, Charles Rangel became the second consecutive Democrat to get booted as head of the tax-writing panel amid a highly-publicized corruption scandal.

The famously unscrupulous politician, who has represented Harlem in the U.S. House for nearly four decades, was most recently reprimanded by the largely remiss House Ethics Committee for taking a couple of corporate-funded trips to the Caribbean during lavish Congressional Black Caucus jaunts. The ethics panel concluded that Rangel, a notoriously feisty powerbroker, violated the chamber’s gift rules in taking the trips.

The arrogant and seemingly untouchable politician blamed the violation on a staff member, assuring he knew nothing about major corporations funding the luxurious excursions. Members of congress shouldn’t be held responsible for their staffs’ mistakes, Rangel asserted at a press conference to respond to the ethics committee’s findings which he labeled “disturbing.”

It marked the admonishment of merely one of Rangel’s many transgressions, which have been well documented in the media and mostly ignored by Democrats, especially House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

One Pulitzer-prize winning political columnist sent Rangel a message: “Sorry, Charlie. You have no one to blame but yourself.” Rangel has become a creature of the rarified insider circles where the normal rules apply only to little people, not to him, the message further says.

Rangel is so sleazy that he’s tried to fend off punishment with money by making generous “campaign contributions” to members of the House Ethics Committee charged with investigating him. The back-door deals and political power peddling have bought him some time, but his mounting legal problems can’t go unpunished forever.

Perhaps Rangel will end up in jail like the disgraced Democrat who was forced out of the House Ways and Means chairmanship before him. Illinois Congressman Dan Rostenkowski served a 15-month prison sentence for operating a scheme in which he traded postal stamps for cash, hired “ghost” employees to pad his congressional payroll with fake workers and used his account at the House stationery shop to buy gifts. Bill Clinton pardoned Rostenkowski in 2000.

The joke of a House Ethics Committee could no longer ignore a famously unscrupulous—and seemingly untouchable—New York congressman’s corrupt activities, finally admonishing him for one of his many transgressions.

While a “public admonishment” from the notoriously remiss House Ethics Committee is merely a figurative slap on the wrist with no further consequence, it certainly presents a dilemma for the Democratic leadership which is already facing serious midterm election loses and all-time low approval ratings.

Like the crooked politician that he has repeatedly proven to be, Rangel claims he knew nothing about major corporations funding the luxurious excursions.

This could very well be the tip of the iceberg for Rangel. Incredibly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues supporting her good friend and refuses to remove him from his prestigious tax committee chairmanship.

Madam Speaker’s ardent support hasn’t wavered even though, fearing the tax probe would reveal his hidden assets, last fall Rangel disclosed that he is at least twice as wealthy as reported in congressional disclosure forms. For years he has concealed assets worth more than $1 million, including a federal credit union account worth between a quarter of a million and half a million dollars, a separate account at a private institution worth about the same, tens of thousands of dollars in municipal bonds and tens of thousands more in rental income.

After being targeted in a series of corruption probes, black congressional leaders have quietly introduced legislation to essentially gut the independent office they helped create to investigate wrongdoing among lawmakers.

Ohio Democrat Marcia Fudge introduced the measure to drastically weaken the independent Office of Congressional Ethics that recently determined her top aide improperly helped black caucus members take a lavish Caribbean trip funded by corporations. Congress created the citizen-run ethics office in 2008 because the House Ethics Committee is a joke that seldom investigates corruption.

But the panel’s inquiries have hit the Congressional Black Caucus hard and nearly half of its members want the vibrant new ethics office to cut back on its aggressive agenda to weed out corruption in the U.S. House of Representatives. Twenty of the 42 members of the all-Democratic caucus support Fudge’s measure, which is also sponsored by Black Caucus Chairwoman Barbara Lee of California.

In its short existence, the ethics office has investigated at least eight black caucus members, including the notoriously crooked Charlie Rangel of New York who got booted as chair of the House Ways and Means Committee this year.
Until the independent ethics office was created, Rangel was practically untouchable because fellow lawmakers on the House Ethics Committee refused to take any action against their beloved colleague.

In a statement to the Cleveland newspaper that broke this story, Fudge claims that she’s simply trying to “perfect” the “processes” of the new ethics panel to ensure that its aims are “achieved in a manner consistent with America’s spirit of justice.” The so-called “processes” must be fair to all people involved, Fudge’s statement goes on to say. Sounds like she just doesn’t want any of her pals to get investigated.

The same hometown newspaper that exposed Charles Rangel for failing to declare $75,000 in rental income on a Caribbean villa, reports that he has concealed eight years worth of rental income on a six-unit structure he owns in the Harlem area that he’s represented in the U.S. House for three decades.

From 1993 to 2000 the veteran Democrat lawmaker has reported no rental income on the property on federal financial disclosure forms even though tenants have paid rent to live there during that time. Over decades Rangel has selectively reported the property’s income, from nothing to up to $50,000 in federal disclosure forms.

It simply marks the latest of numerous violations in Rangel’s storied political career.

Rangel only revealed the information because the House Ethics Committee launched an investigation into his many transgressions last fall and he feared the huge asset omission would be discovered in the course of the probe.

A major news agency reported that Rangel has made hefty campaign contributions to members of the House Ethics Committee charged with investigating him. Since his ethics probes began, the shady congressman has covertly given campaign donations to 119 members of congress, including three of the five Democrats investigating him. They include Kentucky’s Ben Chandler, North Carolina’s G.K. Butterfield and Vermont’s Peter Welch.

The growing scandals and mounting legal problems have created a powerful chorus of one-time supporters calling for Rangel to resign as committee chair. Many insist that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi step up to the plate and yank him from the coveted position, but she refuses to remove her good friend or censure him publicly unless the House Ethics Committee—that he’s been paying off—finds him guilty of misconduct.
The Ethics Committee has also worked on three more serious investigations, which involve allegations of improperly living in multiple rent-stabilized apartments in New York City while claiming his Washington, D.C. home as his primary residence for tax purposes.

In March 2010, Rangel stepped aside as Ways and Means chair. In July 2010, Rangel was charged with multiple ethics violations by the House Ethics Committee and will face a formal hearing to determine his fate.

In July 2008, Rangel asked the United States House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly known as the House Ethics Committee, to determine if his use of a Congressional letterhead while seeking to arrange meetings in which recipients of the letters would be solicited for contributions for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York had violated any House rules.

The New York Times reported on July 10, 2008 that Rangel rents four apartments in the Lenox Terrace complex in Harlem at below-market rates. The newspaper reported that Rangel paid $3,894 monthly for all four apartments in 2007, but that the going rate for similar apartments offered by the landlord in that building would be as high as $8,125 monthly. Three adjacent apartments on the 16th floor were combined to make up his 2,500-square-foot home; a fourth unit on the 10th floor is used as a campaign office, even though that violates city and state regulations that require rent-stabilized apartments to be used as a primary residence. The apartments are in a building owned by the Olnick Organization. Rangel received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from one of the company’s owners, according to The Times. Rangel told the newspaper his rent does not affect his representation of his constituents.

A Congressional ethics experts cited by The Times indicated that the difference in rent between what Rangel was paying and market rates on the second, third and fourth apartments he rented, an estimated $30,000 per year, could be construed as a gift as the savings is granted at the discretion of the landlord and is not offered to the public at large; if this should be treated as a gift, it would exceed the $100 limit established by the House of Representatives. In late July, the House voted 254 to 138 to table a resolution submitted by Minority Leader John Boehner that would have censured Rangel for having “dishonored himself and brought discredit to the House” by occupying the four apartments.

Rangel was also accused of failing to report income from the rental of a villa he owns in Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, a three-bedroom, three-bath unit that has been rented out for as much as $1,100 per night in the busiest tourist season, from mid-December to mid-April. Labor lawyer Theodore Kheel, one of the principal investors in the resort development company and a frequent campaign contributor to Rangel, had encouraged the congressman to purchase the beachside villa. Rangel had purchased the unit in 1988 for $82,750 and financed $53,737.50 of the purchase price for seven years at a rate of 10.5 percent, but was one of several early investors who had interest payments waived in 1990. In September 2008, Lanny Davis, Rangel’s attorney, disclosed that Rangel had failed to report $75,000 in income he had received for renting the condo on his tax returns or in congressional disclosure forms. His accountants were calculating the amounts owed and would be filing amended city, state and federal tax returns to cover the liability for back taxes.

A September 14, 2008 editorial in The New York Times called for Rangel to temporarily step down from his chairmanship, stating that “Mounting embarrassment for taxpayers and Congress makes it imperative that Representative Charles Rangel step aside as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee while his ethical problems are investigated.”

Additional accounting discrepancies were disclosed on September 15, 2008, including omission in Rangel’s financial reports of details regarding the sale of a home he once owned on Colorado Avenue in Washington, DC, discrepancies in the value listed for a property he owns in Sunny Isles, Florida (varying from $50,000 to $100,000 all the way up to $500,000), and inconsistencies in investment fund reporting. While Republican leaders have called for his removal from his role as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee which plays a pivotal role in shaping tax law, Rangel has stated that there is no justification for his removal. “I owed my colleagues and the public adherence to a higher standard of care not only as a member of Congress but even more as the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee,” he said. He also stated that the mistakes were errors of omission that would not justify loss of his position.

An article in the September 18, 2008 New York Post states, “Rep. Charles Rangel has been using a House of Representatives parking garage for years as free storage space for his old Mercedes-Benz – a violation of congressional rules and a potential new tax woe for the embattled lawmaker… House rules forbid use of the garage for long-term storage more than 45 days – and congressional aides told The Post that Rangel’s car has been sitting there for years. A House Web site on parking regulations informs anyone with a space that, under IRS regulations, the benefit of the free parking is considered ‘imputed income’ and must be declared to the government. The spaces are valued by the House at $290 per month. In addition to the storage issue, the vehicle… runs afoul of other rules set forth on the House Web site because it does not have license plates and does not display a current House parking permit.”

In September 2008 Rangel paid back taxes of $10,800, owed from rental income on his Dominican villa. Rangel acknowledged that he had failed to declare $75,000 in rental income from his beachfront villa on his tax returns; he had owed back taxes for at least three years. Rangel’s examples, as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, (which writes the United States tax code) is nothing more than an insult.

On November 23, 2008, the New York Post reported that Rangel took a “homestead” tax break on his Washington, DC house for years while simultaneously occupying multiple New York City rent-stabilized apartments, “possibly violating laws and regulations in both cases.”[85]

In late November 2008, following relevations from another New York Times story, Republican members of Congress asked the House Ethics Committee to look into Rangel’s defense of a tax shelter loophole that allows tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks for a company which has donated $1 million to the City College of New York school named after Rangel; under the loophole approved by Rangel’s Ways and Means Committee, Nabors Industries has been allowed to open a small outlet in Bermuda and call itself a foreign corporation. Rangel denies the charges. Nabors’ CEO, Eugene Isenberg, said that the company’s September 2006 donation was unrelated to what he calls Rangel’s promise to him to oppose the closing of the loophole after a meeting in February 2007. Isenberg gave a further $100,000 to the Rangel Center five days prior to that meeting. Nabors was one of four companies which benefited from the loophole.

The House Ethics Committee voted on December 9, 2008 to expand its investigation of Rangel to examine his role in the Isenberg matter. Isenberg subsequently denied there was any quid pro quo and called the Times article about it “full of malarkey”. The steady stream of revelations and ethics issues led to some loss of standing for Rangel in the House.

Rangel launched a counterattack on the Times, saying it had ignored facts and explanations offered by experts. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied Republican charges that she was trying to force the Ethics Committee investigation to an early conclusion, and Rangel indicated that he had no intention of relinquishing his Ways and Means chair.

In December 2008, it surfaced that Rangel paid $80,000 in campaign funds to an Internet company run by his son for the creation of his PAC website. Screenshots of the website have circulated showing grave misspellings and other errors on the site, and its normal cost of creation might have been more like $100. A representative for the non-profit Campaign Legal Center assessed Rangel’s actions in saying, “This is probably legal but is definitely wrong.”

In January 2009, Representative John R. Carter introduced the Rangel Rule Act of 2009 (H.R. 735), a tongue-in-cheek proposal that would allow all taxpayers to not pay penalties and interest on back taxes, in reference to Rangel not yet having paid them.

During a 2009 visit to Hamilton, Bermuda, Congressman Rangel received a book written by U.S. Consul General Gregory W. Slayton. In May 2009, the National Legal and Policy Center filed an ethics complaint against Rangel and several other members of Congress for trips taken in 2007 and 2008 to Caribbean islands that were sponsored by New York non-profit organization Carib News Foundation. The foundation funded by a number of large corporations with major interests before Congress and the Ways and Means Committee; this combined with the duration of the trips seemed to violate House rules, and the Ethics Committee agreed the following month to investigate the matter.

Some of Rangel’s unreported assets include a federal credit union checking account of between $250,000 and $500,000, several investment accounts, stock in Yum! Brands and PepsiCo, and property in Glassboro, New Jersey. Rangel also did not pay property taxes on two of his New Jersey properties.

On June 26, 2009, Bloomberg News reported on Chairman Rangel’s role in the Diageo Rum Bailout. On September 1, 2009, the Chicago Tribune reported on Chairman Rangel’s lack of action on pending legislation that would prevent $2.9 billion of U.S. Tax dollars from going to British concern Diageo. On September 2, 2009, the L.A. Times reported on Chairman Rangel’s association with a deal to give $2.8 billion of U.S. Tax dollars to Diageo to make rum in the U.S. Virgin Islands. On October 6, 2009, the Washington Times reported on the campaign contributions Chairman Rangel received related to the $2.8 billion rum deal he supports.

On November 12, 2009, The Hill reported on Rangel’s involvement in stopping legislation (H.R. 2122) that prevents $3.9 billion in rum bailouts from being voted on in the Ways and Means Committee.

As 2009 wore on, there was speculation that Rangel would be forced out of Ways and Means chair position, and another Republican resolution was put forth towards that end, but Rangel stayed in place and mostly maintained his role in House leadership and policy discussions, including the Obama health care reform plan. Nevertheless, his influence was diminished by the questions surrounding him, and the political difficulties surrounding the health care legislation hampered his efforts to bring about what would be one of his most significant legislative “accomplishments”.
Media pieces compared Rangel’s woes with those of ethically challenged past Ways and Means chairs Wilbur Mills and Dan Rostenkowski. Speaker Pelosi, a longtime friend of Rangel’s, continues to withhold any possible action against Rangel pending the House Ethics Committee report. Rangel evinced impatience with that body, saying “I don’t have a complaint now, except that it’s taking too goddam long to review this thing and report back.”

On February 26, 2010, the House Ethics Committee issued its report on the matter of Rangel’s Caribbean trips. It determined that Rangel had violated House gift rules by accepting payment from corporations for reimbursement for travel to the 2007 and 2008 conferences. It concluded that Rangel had not known of the contributions in question, but was still responsible for them and would be required to repay their cost. Five other members who made the trip were cleared of having violated rules but also had to repay their trips. Rangel disagreed with the committee’s finding, saying “Because they were my staff members who knew, one of whom has been discharged, [the committee has decided] that I should have known. Common sense dictates that members of Congress should not be held responsible for what could be the wrongdoing, or mistakes or errors of staff.”

The White House backed off its prior support of Rangel a bit, and within days fourteen Democratic members of Congress publicly called on Rangel to step aside as Ways and Means chair. Other Democrats were concerned that Rangel would be a drag on Democrats’ efforts to maintain their majority in the 2010 House elections, but did not want to say anything publicly out of respect and personal affection for Rangel. Pelosi said she would take no action against Rangel now, saying that his staff had been more at fault and that Rangel had not broken any law in this matter, and that she awaited the results of further committee findings. The ethics committee continued to investigate the three more serious charges against Rangel.

Momentum quickly built against Rangel, with up to 30 or more Democrats planning to oppose his continued chairmanship in a full House vote being pushed by Republicans. Representative Paul Hodes of New Hampshire said, “I think we’re in a zero-tolerance atmosphere, and I think … Washington should be held to the highest ethical standards. I have the greatest admiration for Mr. Rangel’s service to this country. He’s been a great public servant. This is very, very unfortunate, but I think it’s necessary.” On March 3, 2010, Rangel said that he would take a leave of absence as chair, pending the issuing of the Ethics Committee’s reports. Pelosi granted the request, but whether such a leave was possible was unclear, and when asked, Pelosi said that a resignation had taken place and that Rangel was no longer chair. Most observers said it was unlikely that Rangel would ever be able to regain the position. Several Democrats said they would return or donate to charity campaign contributions given to them by Rangel. Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan serves as Rangel’s replacement. When asked about his well-known autobiographical phrase, Rangel said, “I haven’t had a bad day yet, but it’s been close.”

By 2010, Rangel’s continuing difficulties, together with the death a few months prior of Percy Sutton and the scandal around, and abandoned election campaign of, Governor David Paterson (Basil Paterson’s son), marked the end of the era of Harlem’s “Gang of Four”. Furthermore, Rangel faced a Democratic primary challenger for his seat, Vincent Morgan, whose grassroots campaign bore many resemblances to Rangel’s own against the scandal-plagued Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. back in 1970. Adam Clayton Powell IV was also challenging Rangel again, as was labor activist and past primary candidate for statewide office Jonathan Tasini. On June 6, 2010, Rangel officially announced the start of his re-election campaign. While Rangel’s fund-raising is down from previous years, and he has paid over $1 million in legal fees, he still has far more cash available for the campaign than any of his challengers.

On July 22, 2010, an investigative subcommittee of the House Ethics Committee indicated that Rangel probably violated a range of ethics rules in the cases involving the more serious charges. The matter was referred to another, newly created, special subcommittee to rule on the findings, and Rangel will face a trial-like, formal hearing soon.

On September 1, 2009, Rangel injected race into the American health care reform debate at a forum in Washington Heights, accusing opponents of the president’s reform proposal of racism saying, “Some Americans have not gotten over the fact that Obama is president of the United States. They go to sleep wondering, ‘How did this happen?'” He went on to say that when critics object to Obama “trying to interfere” with their lives by pushing for health care reform, “then you know there’s just a misunderstanding, a bias, a prejudice, an emotional feeling. We’re going to have to move forward notwithstanding that.” He also compared the battle over health care expansion for the uninsured to the fight for civil rights saying, “Why do we have to wait for the right to vote? Why can’t we get what God has given us? That is the right to live as human beings and not negotiate with white southerners and not count the votes. Just do the right thing.”

Judicial Watch: List of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” for 2009
#10) Rep. Charles Rangel And what did he do when the House Ethics Committee started looking into all of this? He apparently resorted to making “campaign contributions” to dig his way out of trouble. According to WCBS TV, (http://wcbstv.com/local/charles.rangel.ethics.2.1160326.html) a New York CBS affiliate: “The reigning member of Congress’ top tax committee is apparently ‘wrangling’ other politicos to get him out of his own financial and tax troubles…Since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him.”

Charlie Rangel should not be allowed to remain in Congress, let alone serve as Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, and he knows it. That’s why he felt the need to disburse campaign contributions to Ethics Committee members and other congressional colleagues.

Our so-called “Public Servants” in this country have shown an unacceptable level of imperialistc royalty and arrogance when We, The People as questions and attempt to hold them accountable. This behavior can not be tolerated.

We now have an invisible empire above We, The People.

And we’re damned tired of their smug faces, ridicule and middle fingers.

THEY ARE OUR REPRESENTATIVES! NOT OUR RULERS! THEY WORK FOR US AND ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO US!

Every day we awake to a new barrage of sewer billowing from the DC machine and from our so-called “Representatives” in Government. It’s nothing less than a travesty what they’re doing to the American people.

Starting today, I’m going to post a daily TWG GROWL. It’ll be whatever is on my mind for that particular day, and it usually begins the moment I awake.

Today’s GROWL is related to the relentless attack on our second amendment rights.

The Federal government and the United Nations have been working in unison for years to systematically disarm American citizens. Why is it so critical that they disarm us?

Today, many men and women have reason to believe that the United Nations and the Federal government are intent on disarming the American people as a means to significantly greater control the way citizens in disarmed China, Germany, the Soviet Union and Cuba were controlled.

We’ve seen Constitutional protections for fundamental individual rights eroded by a government that is actively hostile to the legacy of individual sovereignty we inherited from the American Revolution, and abandoned by countrymen who have surrendered to fear, laziness, apathy and complacency.

We’re entangled in laws that portray natural rights as vices and attack them in the name of false security, and by government that grows like a cancer until it occupies every area of human life.

We’ve seen people fined, imprisoned, and even murdered by officials for doing no more than acting on their liberty in ways that draw the displeasure of those who treat independence as a threat and the coercive power of the state as a plaything.

We’ve been told from those in our current administration that “political power comes from the barrel of a gun”. These are also words spoken by Mao Zedong and Lenin, dictators who murdered millions of their own countrymen! We’ve heard people in our own current administration, such as Anita Dunn, telling a group of college students that she “looks up to Chairman Mao.”

Really? REALLY? JUST WHO, AND WHAT DO THEY THINK THEY ARE?

When we express anger, we law-abiding gun owners and Patriotic Americans of today are presented as “gun nuts, extremists, militia fanatics, and killers” in the lame-stream media. Why?

Can you understand why tolerance pushed beyond a limit of fairness leads to justifiable anger? Can you understand why being told we cannot enjoy the same safety our leaders and representatives in government enjoy invokes outrage? Is a politician’s life more important than your life?

Gun owners are clearly losing rights with each new gun law. We’re constantly trying to correct statistics, and those against our second amendment rights don’t even want to be
educated because they are convinced regardless of all that information that the real problem is that the (evil) firearms owners have hate and violence in their hearts. Nothing could be further from the truth. But then, what do they care?

The fact that the barrage of legislation proposed today only apply to people who ALREADY own a handgun tells me that it’s not about crime prevention, it’s about harassment.

Personally, I want to live in a free society, not one with the government as chief nanny.

Criminals often kill people who’ve already turned over their money and put up no resistance. If a woman does not resist and the criminal intends to rape her, she will be raped.

Are we supposed to simply Submit when confronted with an armed rapist or murderer and leave our ourselves at their mercy?

I strongly disagree.

How is this different from the way the tyrants and news organizations of Nazi Germany,China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, and Cuba propagandized against the segments of their societies that opposed complete state control?

Many documented statements by anti-gun groups claim that the Second Amendment refers to the power of the States to keep and bear arms. In other sections of the Constitution, we find the following statements:

“the right of the PEOPLE to peaceably assemble,”

the “right of the PEOPLE to be secure in their homes,”

“enumeration here of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the PEOPLE,” and “the powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the PEOPLE.”

Do you honestly believe “the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms” refers to the States but excludes Individuals?

The argument against our second amendment rights fail the basic tests of logic. Their argument is not determined by its truth, accuracy, or even that it is fully understood.

Let me remind you that Authority is NOT truth. TRUTH is authority.

They are our Representatives. NOT our rulers.

Our second amendment rights have nearly been decimated. It is time to stand up and be heard. Before there is nothing left to save.

GUN RIGHTS ARE CIVIL RIGHTS.

GUNS ARE RIGHTS.

Guns are the right of self-preservation, our basic human right to life itself. Our rights are, of course, everyone’s rights — whether or not some choose not to own firearms.

GUN RIGHTS are HUMAN RIGHTS. There are no rights at all for a disarmed population.

Society is not giving the citizens the protection, status, and empowerment usually offered to victims who are denied their civil rights.

Criminals get guns, knives, and bludgeons any time they wish, and they disobey whatever laws they wish–including laws against robbery, rape, and murder. Why would you want to make law-abiding citizens easier prey by taking away, or limiting their right to own and carry, their guns?

The ACLU and most Americans think a door-to-door search for drugs is a gross violation of civil rights. Many gun banners would like to see door-to-door confiscation of guns. Are you willing to have Your Home searched for guns (or anything else) any time the government wishes to do so?

To the politicians and officials who treat our rights as if they were privileges that they might limit or remove at will, we say that WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH.

You have overstepped your bounds and cut away at that which no government, no legislature, no agency, no referendum, no quorum, no majority, and no power of any sort may trespass against except at its own peril.

By your actions, you have deprived the institutions in which you do your worst of their legitimacy.

You have awakened the GIANT, and We, The People are going to monitor the activities of our politicians and government bureaucrats who threaten liberty, and to share such information as we gather with others who also value freedom so that those who engage in abuses can not hide behind official anonymity.

We do this not to turn our backs on our friends, relatives, and neighbors who have been duped into abandoning liberty, but to defend the rights whose value they have forgotten for them as well as ourselves.

You want to institute a system where the weak and elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that citizens are disarmed.

Sorry, that’s unacceptable.

Fidelity to the Constitution is an absoloute MUST in your positions. Otherwise, we will vote you out and replace you with those who will keep their solemn oath to do so.

WHO AND WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?

Our Republic is no longer the unified force for freedom that it once was. The dignity of office… the respect for law… and the commitment to spreading the shining and brilliant
love of freedom that we based our lives upon, has slowly but surely been transformed into an ignorant and careless abrogation of our duties and responsibilities.

We see our Senators calling for the dismantling of our Constitution, and for the change of
our representative government into officially sanctioned mob rule.

We see our leaders commit disgusting crimes in the face of our people, and explain away the consequences by the definition of simple words. Giving We, The People nothing but empty words, smug faces and middle fingers when we ask WHY.

We, The People need to be ever vigilant in upholding our Constitution because the people who took an oath to protect it aren’t keeping that oath.

Ask yourselves…….What agenda for the United States do they have planned that requires disarming the citizens of our country?STOP PUNISHING LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS

Like this:

‎”The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of “liberalism” they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” ~Norman Thomas, for many years U.S. Socialist Presidential candidate.

Like this:

A collection of quotations from elite figures, media heads, government officials, persons from history, authors and more on the subject of the move toward a new world order under a one world government and a reduced human population.

————————————————————————-

It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.
George Washington

————————————————————————-

“Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government – a bureaucratic elite.”
Senator William Jenner, 1954

————————————————————————-

“The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and creators of the system, they will rule the future.”
U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in his l964 book: With No Apologies.

————————————————————————-

“The case for government by elites is irrefutable.”
Senator William Fulbright, Former chairman of the US Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, stated at a 1963 symposium entitled: The Elite and the Electorate – Is Government by the People Possible?

————————————————————————-

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, l933

————————————————————————-

“The depression was the calculated ‘shearing’ of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market….The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.”
Curtis Dall, FDR’s son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law

————————————————————————-

“The United States must stay involved in the world and we must lead. Today there is a strange coalition at work in Washington and across the country consisting of people on the political right and the political left coming together to keep us from staying involved. Big labor and liberal Democrats are joining some Republicans on the right in calling for America to come home, (saying) we have done our part and that it’s time for others to do the heavy lifting on international leadership. And we must not listen to that siren’s call of protection and isolation. ”
Former President George Bush
Addressing Duke University Graduates May 17, 1998
USA Today May 29, 1998

————————————————————————-

“Rarely have Americans lived through so much change, in so many ways, in so short a time. Quietly, but with gathering force, the ground has shifted beneath our feet as we have moved into an Information Age, a global economy, a truly new world.”
President William Clinton State of the Union Address 1998

————————————————————————-

“…all of us here at the policy-making level have had experience with directives…from the White House…. The substance of them is that we shall use our grant-making power so as to alter our life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., President – Ford Foundation (as told to Norman Dodd, Congressional Reese Commission 1954)

————————————————————————-

“The New Deal is plainly an attempt to achieve a working socialism and avert a social collapse in America; it is extraordinarily parallel to the successive ‘policies’ and ‘Plans’ of the Russian experiment. Americans shirk the word ‘socialism’, but what else can one call it?”
H.G. Wells The New World Order 1939

————————————————————————-

“Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have.”
Richard Salent, former president, CBS News

————————————————————————-

“Ultimately, our objective is to welcome the Soviet Union back into the world order. Perhaps the world order of the future will truly be a family of nations.”
President George Bush Texas A&M University 1989

————————————————————————-

“We will succeed in the Gulf. And when we do, the world community will have sent an enduring warning to any dictator or despot, present or future, who contemplates outlaw aggression. The world can therefore seize this opportunity to fufill the long-held promise of a new world order – where brutality will go unrewarded, and aggression will meet collective resistance.”
President George Bush State of the Union Address 1991

————————————————————————-

“Under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not the character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner. . . .” [This is compassionate liberalism.]
Fabian Socialist Bernard Shaw in his Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, 1928.

————————————————————————-

“Since March 9, 1933, the United states has been in a state of national emergency. A majority of the people of the United States have their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (now 72 years) freedoms and governmental procedures, guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought forth by states of national emergency.”
Senate Report 93-549 (1973).

————————————————————————-

“Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”
Sir Julian Huxley, first Director General of UNESCO, 1946-1948.

————————————————————————-

“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
Margaret Sanger, outspoken atheist and socialist, founder of the Voluntary Parenthood League in 1914, and responsible for opening the first birth control clinic in the United States in New York City.

————————————————————————-

“We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn’t. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows.”
Katherine Graham, Washington Post publisher and CFR member.

————————————————————————-

“The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.”
Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby, the New Generation

————————————————————————-

‘They came first for the Communists…
but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews…
but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Jews…
but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Unionists…
but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics…
but I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me…and by that time…
there was no-one left to speak up for me.

– Rev. Martin Niemoller, commenting on events in Germany 1933-1939

————————————————————————-

“I reject the idea that humans are superior to other life forms. . . Man is just an ape with an overly developed sense of superiority.”
— Paul Watson, director of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and a founder of Greenpeace

————————————————————————-

“You know the one thing that is wrong in this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say.”
President Bill Clinton

————————————————————————-

“There is no such thing as an independent press in America, unless it is in the country towns. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print.

“I am paid $150.00 a week for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for doing similar things. If I should permit honest opinions to be printed in one issue of my paper, like Othello, before twenty-four hours, my occupation would be gone.

“The business of the New York journalist is to destroy truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify, to fawn at the feet of Mammon; to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. We are the tools and vessels for rich men behind the scenes. We are intellectual prostitutes.”

John Swinton, editor of the New York Tribune.

————————————————————————-

“We are going to impose our agenda on the coverage by dealing with issues and subjects that we choose to deal with.”
Richard M. Cohen, Senior Producer of CBS political news.

————————————————————————-

“In total, during the first eighty-eight years of this century, almost 170 million men, women, and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed, or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed, or killed in any other of the myriad ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is as though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not of germs.”
Dr. R. J. Rummel, Death by Government.

————————————————————————-

“The people will be crushed under the burden of taxes, loan after loan will be floated; after having drained the present, the State will devour the future.”
Fredric Bastiat

————————————————————————-

“Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles tonight called for the early creation of an international organization of anti-Axis nations to control the world during the period between the armistice at the end of the present war and the setting up of a new world order on a permanent basis.”
Text of article in The Philadelphia Inquirer (June 1942)

————————————————————————-

“The statement went on to say that the spiritual teachings of religion must become the foundation for the new world order and that national sovereignty must be subordinate to the higher moral law of God.”
American Institute of Judaism, excerpt from article in The New York Times (December 1942)

————————————————————————-

“There are some plain common-sense considerations applicable to all these attempts at world planning. They can be briefly stated: 1. To talk of blueprints for the future or building a world order is, if properly understood, suggestive, but it is also dangerous. Societies grow far more truly than they are built. A constitution for a new world order is never like a blueprint for a skyscraper.”
Norman Thomas, in his book What Is Our Destiny? (1944)

————————————————————————-

“The United Nations, he told an audience at Harvard University, ‘has not been able–nor can it be able–to shape a new world order which events so compellingly demand.’ … The new world order that will answer economic, military, and political problems, he said, ‘urgently requires, I believe, that the United States take the leadership among all free peoples to make the underlying concepts and aspirations of national sovereignty truly meaningful through the federal approach.”
Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, in an article entitled “Rockefeller Bids Free Lands Unite: Calls at Harvard for Drive to Build New World Order” — The New York Times (February 1962)

————————————————————————-

“He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying nothing more about the prospects for future contacts and merely reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an interest in peace and building ‘a new world order.”
Excerpt from an article in The New York Times (February 1972)

————————————————————————-

“If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis … In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than f rom the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”
Richard N. Gardner, in Foreign Affairs (April 1974)

————————————————————————-

“The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth – in Morocco – to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund.”
Part of full-page advertisement by the government of Morocco in The New York Times (April 1994)

————————————————————————-

“Fifty men have run America, and that’s a high figure.” Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.

————————————————————————-

“The truth of the matter is that you do have those standby provisions, and the statutory emergency plans are there whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism, apprehend, invoke the military, and arrest Americans and hold them in detention camps.”
U.S. Representative Henry Gonzalez, August 29, 1994

————————————————————————-

“We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.”
Mikhail Gorbachev 1987

————————————————————————-

“National Socialism will use its own revolution for establishing of a new world order.”
Adolph Hitler during World War II

————————————————————————-

“To keep global resource use within prudent limits while the poor raise their living standards, affluent societies need to consume less.
Population, consumption, technology, development, and the environment are linked in complex relationships that bear closely on human welfare in the global neighbourhood. Their effective and equitable management calls for a systemic, long-term, global approach guided by the principle of sustainable development, which has been the central lesson from the mounting ecological dangers of recent times. Its universal application is a priority among the tasks of global governance.”
United Nations Our Global Neighborhood 1995

————————————————————————-

“[E]ducation should aim not so much at acquisition of knowledge. . . [today] there is less need to know the content of information. . . . [There should be a] transformation of life in totality . . . [a] profound commitment to social tasks. . . . Achievement of socialist countries . . . have laid the foundation of a way of life which makes everyone understand its [sic] individual relevance. . . [whereas capitalism] lays the foundation of rivalry and aggression and encourages exaggerated consumption, [making] man a slave of ambition and social status symbols. . . [Lifelong learning promotes] equality of end result, and not merely of opportunity . . . [and] fosters equality in terms of opinions, aspirations, motivation, and so on. . . . There is a dilemma — if lifelong education were to be based on the aim of increasing the yield of business enterprises and economic growth, it would merely serve to establish a totalitarian, one-dimension society.”
— Foundations of Lifelong Education, a UNESCO publication in 1976.

————————————————————————-

“There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international . . . network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies . . . but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”
Professor Carroll Quigley, in his book Tragedy and Hope, 1966.

————————————————————————-

“A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine.

————————————————————————-

“We in the press like to say we’re honest brokers of information and it’s just not true. The press does have an agenda.”
Bernard Goldberg, as quoted by Harry Stein in the June 13-19, 1992 TV Guide.

————————————————————————-

“The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen….At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties.”
New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

————————————————————————-

“Let me control a peoples currency and I care not who makes their laws.”
Meyer Nathaniel Rothschild in a speech to a gathering of world bankers February 12, 1912. The following year, the USA subscribed to the ‘services’ of the newly incorporated Federal Reserve, headed by Mr. Rothschild.

————————————————————————-

“We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated. The individual may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this is only his personal point of view. . . Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. . . . We must electronically control the brain. Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electronic stimulation of the brain.”
Dr. Jose M.R. Delgado, Director of Neuropsychiatry, Yale University Medical School, Congressional Record, No. 26, Vol. 118, February 24, 1974.

————————————————————————-

“One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order.”
From The National Educator, K.M. Heaton

————————————————————————-

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of “liberalism” they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” Norman Thomas, for many years U.S. Socialist Presidential candidate.

————————————————————————-

“The time for absolute and exclusive sovereignty…has passed; its theory was never matched by reality.”
UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, An Agenda for Peace, 1992.

————————————————————————-

“The world can therefore seize the opportunity [Persian Gulf crisis] to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind.”
George Herbert Walker Bush

————————————————————————-

“Naturally the common people don’t want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY.”
Hermann Goering, President of the Reichstag, Nazi Party, and Luftwaffe Commander in Chief

————————————————————————-

“We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn’t. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows.”
— Katherine Graham, Washington Post publisher and Bilderberger

————————————————————————-

“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

————————————————————————-

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.

————————————————————————-

“I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers than it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist…. I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus.”
Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom, Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.

————————————————————————-

“It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the so-called pagan religions, such as that of the American Indians, the Polynesians, and the Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more realistic in terms of conservation ethics than the more intellectual monotheistic philosophies of the revealed religions.”
Press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on the occasion of the “Caring for Creation” conference of the North American Conference on Religion and Ecology, May 18, 1990.

————————————————————————-

“I don’t claim to have any special interest in natural history, but as a boy I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of game animals and the need to adjust the ‘cull’ to the size of the surplus population.”
Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1988, p.|8.

————————————————————————-

“This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken, the pieces are in flux, soon they will settle again. Before they do, let us re-order this world around us.”
Tony Blair, Tuesday, 2 October, 2001

————————————————————————-

“Other countries will not take lectures about the so-called new world order from a British prime minister who cannot deliver basic public services run by his own failing government.”
Tony Blair, 5th January, 2002

————————————————————————-

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

————————————————————————-

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”
– David Rockefeller

————————————————————————-

“We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order, a world where the rule of law, not the rule of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders.”
President George Bush, 1991

————————————————————————-

“No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation.”
David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

————————————————————————-

“Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.”
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991